| | | WNBA : Money Line Matchup |
| |
TULSA
WASHINGTON |
|
|
162
| 77
Final
82 |
|
|
| | |
|
| |  | |
| 651 | TULSA | +155 | | 652 | WASHINGTON | -175 |
|
|
|  | |
|
| | | One of the growing resources utilized by sports handicappers is the public betting information offered by a variety of sources. Leading the way in this is Sportsbook.com, who offers the data at its website in real-time. |
|
| | |
|
 - Favorites vs. the money line (WASHINGTON) - average 3PT shooting team (30-35%) against a poor 3PT defense (>=35%) after 15+ games, hot shooting team - 2 straight games making >=45% of their shots.
(47-6 since 1997.) (88.7%, +36.8 units. Rating = 4*) |  - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - after going over the total by 18 or more points total in their last three games, a bad team, winning 25% to 40% of their games after 15 or more games.
(104-54 since 1997.) (65.8%, +34.6 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - after going over the total by 30 or more points total in their last five games, a bad team, winning 25% to 40% of their games after 15 or more games.
(83-37 since 1997.) (69.2%, +33.8 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (WASHINGTON) - average 3PT shooting team (30-35%) against a poor 3PT defense (>=35%) after 15+ games, hot shooting team - 2 straight games making >=45% of their shots.
(55-23 since 1997.) (70.5%, +31.2 units. Rating = 3*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - good shooting team (43.5-46%) against an average shooting team (40.5-43.5%) after 15+ games, after 4 straight games - allowing a shooting pct. of 42% or higher.
(32-14 since 1997.) (69.6%, +25.6 units. Rating = 3*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - after going over the total by 36 or more points total in their last five games, a bad team, winning 25% to 40% of their games after 15 or more games.
(66-29 since 1997.) (69.5%, +24.1 units. Rating = 1*) | - Any team vs the money line (WASHINGTON) - off a home win by 10 points or more, with a winning percentage of between 40-49% on the season.
(26-12 over the last 5 seasons.) (68.4%, +17.8 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (WASHINGTON) - poor defensive team (72-76 PPG) against a horrible defensive team (>=76 PPG), after a win by 10 points or more.
(82-30 over the last 5 seasons.) (73.2%, +40.7 units. Rating = 3*) | - Any team vs the money line (WASHINGTON) - average shooting team (40.5-43.5%) against an terrible defensive team (>=46%), in a game involving two average rebounding teams (+/-3 reb/game).
(31-9 since 1997.) (77.5%, +22.9 units. Rating = 3*) | - Any team vs the money line (WASHINGTON) - average defensive team (40.5-43.5%) against a horrible defensive team (>=46%), in a game involving two average rebounding teams (+/-3 reb/game) after 15+ games.
(27-7 since 1997.) (79.4%, +20.7 units. Rating = 3*) | - Any team vs the money line (WASHINGTON) - average defensive team (40.5-43.5%) against a horrible defensive team (>=46%) after 15+ games, in a game involving two average rebounding teams (+/-3 reb/game).
(27-7 since 1997.) (79.4%, +20.7 units. Rating = 3*) | - Any team vs the money line (WASHINGTON) - average defensive team (40.5-43.5%) against a horrible defensive team (>=46%) after 15+ games, in a game involving two average rebounding teams (+/-3 reb/game) after 15+ games.
(27-7 since 1997.) (79.4%, +20.7 units. Rating = 3*) | - Home favorites vs. the money line (WASHINGTON) - after allowing 75 points or more in 3 straight games against opponent after allowing 80 points or more in 3 straight games.
(27-5 since 1997.) (84.4%, +19.7 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (WASHINGTON) - after a win by 10 points or more against opponent after a combined score of 165 points or more in 2 straight games.
(25-13 over the last 5 seasons.) (65.8%, +16 units. Rating = 1*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (WASHINGTON) - after beating the spread by 18 or more points total in their last three games, in non-conference games.
(42-19 over the last 5 seasons.) (68.9%, +19.4 units. Rating = 1*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - terrible defensive team - allowing 77+ points/game on the season against opponent after a win by 10 points or more.
(136-67 over the last 5 seasons.) (67%, +41.7 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - after 2 or more consecutive overs, an excellent offensive team (>=76 PPG) against a poor defensive team (72-76 PPG).
(47-31 over the last 5 seasons.) (60.3%, +20.1 units. Rating = 1*) |
|
|
- Home teams vs. the money line (WASHINGTON) - poor defensive team - allowing 73+ points/game on the season, in May, June, or July games.
(471-509 since 1997.) (48.1%, +103.7 units. Rating = 2*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (WASHINGTON) - poor defensive team - allowing 73+ points/game on the season, in July games.
(269-273 since 1997.) (49.6%, +99.2 units. Rating = 2*) | - Road teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - long range shooting team - attempting 16 or more 3 point shots/game, in July games.
(158-175 since 1997.) (47.4%, +68.5 units. Rating = 2*) | - Road teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - explosive offensive team - scoring 77+ points/game on the season, in July games.
(154-127 since 1997.) (54.8%, +66.6 units. Rating = 3*) | - Road teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - good free throw shooting team - making >=76% of their free throws, in July games.
(84-67 over the last 5 seasons.) (55.6%, +61.9 units. Rating = 4*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (WASHINGTON) - after allowing 75 points or more against opponent after scoring 90 points or more.
(63-33 over the last 5 seasons.) (65.6%, +33.1 units. Rating = 3*) | - Road teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - after scoring 90 points or more against opponent after a combined score of 155 points or more.
(59-35 over the last 5 seasons.) (62.8%, +34.8 units. Rating = 3*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - an explosive offensive team (>=76 PPG) against a good offensive team (72-76 PPG), after scoring 75 points or more in 3 straight games.
(49-20 over the last 5 seasons.) (71%, +17.6 units. Rating = 0*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (WASHINGTON) - well rested team - playing 5 or less games in 14 days, in July games.
(91-94 over the last 5 seasons.) (49.2%, +48.7 units. Rating = 2*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (WASHINGTON) - up-tempo team averaging 62 or more shots/game on the season against opponent after a game where a team made 50% of their shots or better.
(78-56 over the last 5 seasons.) (58.2%, +29.8 units. Rating = 2*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (WASHINGTON) - after allowing 75 points or more in 2 straight games against opponent after scoring 90 points or more.
(42-16 over the last 5 seasons.) (72.4%, +35.7 units. Rating = 4*) | - Road teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - in a game involving 2 up-tempo teams (>=62 shots/game), after a game where a team made 50% of their shots or better.
(71-44 over the last 5 seasons.) (61.7%, +34.6 units. Rating = 2*) | - Road teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - good ball handling team - committing <=14 turnovers/game, in May, June, or July games.
(90-77 over the last 5 seasons.) (53.9%, +40.8 units. Rating = 2*) | - Road teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - good ball handling team - committing <=14 turnovers/game, in July games.
(53-39 over the last 5 seasons.) (57.6%, +35.7 units. Rating = 3*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (WASHINGTON) - after allowing 75 points or more in 2 straight games against opponent after a combined score of 155 points or more.
(113-84 over the last 5 seasons.) (57.4%, +57.4 units. Rating = 3*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (WASHINGTON) - with a losing record after 15 or more games, in July games.
(56-30 over the last 5 seasons.) (65.1%, +39.1 units. Rating = 4*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (WASHINGTON) - after allowing 75 points or more in 2 straight games against opponent after 2 straight games where both teams scored 70 points or more.
(73-47 over the last 5 seasons.) (60.8%, +49.4 units. Rating = 3*) | - Any team vs the money line (WASHINGTON) - a good offensive team (72-76 PPG) against a horrible defensive team (>=76 PPG) after 15+ games, after scoring 75 points or more in 2 straight games.
(59-34 since 1997.) (63.4%, +30.2 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (WASHINGTON) - a good offensive team (72-76 PPG) against a horrible defensive team (>=76 PPG) after 15+ games, after scoring 80 points or more.
(24-9 over the last 5 seasons.) (72.7%, +16.6 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (WASHINGTON) - a good offensive team (72-76 PPG) against a horrible defensive team (>=76 PPG), after scoring 75 points or more in 2 straight games.
(30-11 over the last 5 seasons.) (73.2%, +18.2 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - an explosive offensive team (>=76 PPG) against a good offensive team (72-76 PPG) after 15+ games, after scoring 75 points or more in 3 straight games.
(87-44 since 1997.) (66.4%, +28.1 units. Rating = 1*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - revenging a straight up loss versus opponent as a favorite, off a close loss by 3 points or less to a division rival.
(38-17 since 1997.) (69.1%, +27.4 units. Rating = 3*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (WASHINGTON) - with a losing record after 15 or more games, in May, June, or July games.
(57-32 over the last 5 seasons.) (64%, +36.6 units. Rating = 3*) | - Any team vs the money line (WASHINGTON) - a good offensive team (72-76 PPG) against a horrible defensive team (>=76 PPG) after 15+ games, after allowing 75 points or more in 2 straight games.
(60-32 since 1997.) (65.2%, +24.5 units. Rating = 2*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (WASHINGTON) - after allowing 75 points or more in 3 straight games against opponent after scoring 90 points or more.
(28-12 over the last 5 seasons.) (70%, +20.9 units. Rating = 2*) | - Road teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - an explosive offensive team (>=76 PPG) against a good offensive team (72-76 PPG), after a combined score of 165 points or more.
(26-9 over the last 5 seasons.) (74.3%, +21.3 units. Rating = 3*) | - Road teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - an explosive offensive team (>=76 PPG) against a good offensive team (72-76 PPG), after a game where both teams scored 75 points or more.
(31-14 over the last 5 seasons.) (68.9%, +19.9 units. Rating = 2*) | - Road teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - an explosive offensive team (>=76 PPG) against a good offensive team (72-76 PPG), after a combined score of 155 points or more.
(41-18 over the last 5 seasons.) (69.5%, +22.7 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - an explosive offensive team (>=76 PPG) against a good offensive team (72-76 PPG), after scoring 75 points or more.
(94-40 over the last 5 seasons.) (70.1%, +31.7 units. Rating = 1*) | - Road teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - after one or more consecutive overs, an explosive offensive team (>=76 PPG) against a good offensive team (72-76 PPG).
(34-14 over the last 5 seasons.) (70.8%, +20 units. Rating = 2*) | - Road teams vs. the money line (TULSA) - an explosive offensive team (>=76 PPG) against a good offensive team (72-76 PPG), after allowing 75 points or more.
(40-19 over the last 5 seasons.) (67.8%, +21.4 units. Rating = 2*) | - Home teams vs. the money line (WASHINGTON) - after 2 or more consecutive wins, with a losing record.
(25-13 over the last 5 seasons.) (65.8%, +19.8 units. Rating = 2*) | - Any team vs the money line (WASHINGTON) - after having won 4 of their last 5 games, with a winning percentage of between 45-55% after 15 or more games.
(29-11 over the last 5 seasons.) (72.5%, +23.9 units. Rating = 3*) | - Any team vs the money line (TULSA) - an explosive offensive team (>=76 PPG) against a good offensive team (72-76 PPG), after scoring 80 points or more.
(76-27 over the last 5 seasons.) (73.8%, +33.7 units. Rating = 2*) |
|
| | |
|
| TULSA | 79 | | 29-70 | 42.1% | 6-17 | 31.8% | 15-19 | 77.4% | 42 | 12 | 11 | | WASHINGTON | 82 | | 31-67 | 45.5% | 6-17 | 32.8% | 15-18 | 82.6% | 44 | 11 | 13 |
| | The number of simulations in which each team won the game straight up are listed below. If one time held a significant advantage against the money line, the edge is indicated. | In 1000 simulated games, WASHINGTON won the game straight up 591 times, while TULSA won 385 times.
No Edge. |
|
|
| Potential StatFox Money Line Power Trends to watch out for:
| |
TULSA is 21-20 against the money line (+14.9 Units) when they score 78 or more points in a game over the last 3 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 87.5, OPPONENT 85.8 | WASHINGTON is 82-141 against the money line (-49.4 Units) in up-tempo games where they attempt 84 or more shots since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 75.0, OPPONENT 78.4 | WASHINGTON is 24-34 against the money line (-19.5 Units) in home games when they make 29% to 35% of their three point attempts in a game since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 71.7, OPPONENT 75.6 | WASHINGTON is 41-50 against the money line (-26.0 Units) in home games in games attempting around the same number of free throws as opponents since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 74.0, OPPONENT 77.1 | WASHINGTON is 115-184 against the money line (-69.6 Units) when they grab 8 to 12 offensive rebounds in a game since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.5, OPPONENT 74.2 | WASHINGTON is 19-78 against the money line (-58.2 Units) when they allow 78 to 82 points in a game since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 72.2, OPPONENT 79.7 | WASHINGTON is 5-35 against the money line (-24.8 Units) when they allow 78 or more points in a game over the last 3 seasons.
The average score was WASHINGTON 76.1, OPPONENT 85.8 | WASHINGTON is 55-127 against the money line (-65.8 Units) in games where they force 12 or fewer turnovers since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 69.8, OPPONENT 75.6 | WASHINGTON is 58-98 against the money line (-39.3 Units) when they have the around same number of rebounds as their opponents in a game since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.5, OPPONENT 74.1 | WASHINGTON is 41-52 against the money line (-25.1 Units) in home games where both teams score 71 or more points in a game since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 80.5, OPPONENT 83.2 |
|
TULSA is 10-29 against the money line (-21.2 Units) in up-tempo games where they attempt 84 or more shots over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 80.3, OPPONENT 84.8 | TULSA is 1-8 against the money line (-8.0 Units) when they make 40% to 44% of their shots in a game this season.
The average score was TULSA 76.8, OPPONENT 80.9 | TULSA is 3-12 against the money line (-9.9 Units) when they make 29% to 35% of their three point attempts in a game over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 74.8, OPPONENT 79.2 | TULSA is 2-13 against the money line (-11.7 Units) when their opponents make 29% to 35% of their 3 pointers in a game over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 75.2, OPPONENT 81.6 | TULSA is 4-16 against the money line (-14.4 Units) when they attempt 17 to 22 free throws in a game over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 76.9, OPPONENT 82.5 | TULSA is 8-28 against the money line (-19.3 Units) when they allow 78 or more points in a game over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 83.0, OPPONENT 88.6 | TULSA is 9-21 against the money line (-13.3 Units) in games where they force 13 to 18 turnovers over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 79.1, OPPONENT 82.9 | TULSA is 9-25 against the money line (-14.3 Units) where both teams score 71 or more points in a game over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 84.3, OPPONENT 88.3 | WASHINGTON is 6-2 against the money line (+7.3 Units) when they attempt 17 to 22 free throws in a game this season.
The average score was WASHINGTON 80.3, OPPONENT 74.8 | WASHINGTON is 7-2 against the money line (+9.3 Units) when they score 78 or more points in a game this season.
The average score was WASHINGTON 83.8, OPPONENT 76.4 |
|
| | |
|
TULSA is 12-9 against the money line (+12.6 Units) versus teams who average 42 or more rebounds/game on the season over the last 3 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 81.5, OPPONENT 84.3 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 111-132 against the money line (-48.9 Units) when playing against a team with a losing record since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.7, OPPONENT 71.7 - (Rating = 0*) | WASHINGTON is 57-74 against the money line (-37.8 Units) when playing against a team with a losing record after 15+ games after 15+ games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.1, OPPONENT 72.1 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 20-29 against the money line (-20.0 Units) in home games versus teams who attempt 16 or more 3 point shots/game on the season after 15+ games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 72.1, OPPONENT 75.0 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 34-46 against the money line (-23.0 Units) in home games versus teams who attempt 16 or more 3 point shots/game on the season since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 72.5, OPPONENT 74.1 - (Rating = 0*) | WASHINGTON is 53-86 against the money line (-33.4 Units) versus teams who make 5 or more 3 point shots/game on the season after 15+ games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.3, OPPONENT 74.5 - (Rating = 0*) | WASHINGTON is 24-38 against the money line (-28.7 Units) in home games vs. good free throw shooting teams - making >=76% of their attempts after 15+ games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.9, OPPONENT 73.2 - (Rating = 2*) | WASHINGTON is 108-185 against the money line (-82.8 Units) versus poor foul drawing teams - attempting <=24 free throws/game after 15+ games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 69.1, OPPONENT 73.6 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 171-267 against the money line (-93.1 Units) versus poor foul drawing teams - attempting <=24 free throws/game since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 69.9, OPPONENT 73.3 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 59-94 against the money line (-43.1 Units) versus terrible defensive teams - allowing 73+ points/game after 15+ games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 72.8, OPPONENT 77.1 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 54-99 against the money line (-42.4 Units) versus explosive offensive teams - scoring 73+ points/game after 15+ games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 72.7, OPPONENT 77.9 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 33-68 against the money line (-31.5 Units) versus good ball handling teams - committing <=14 turnovers/game after 15+ games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 67.6, OPPONENT 73.3 - (Rating = 0*) | WASHINGTON is 53-96 against the money line (-36.5 Units) versus good ball handling teams - committing <=14 turnovers/game since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 68.6, OPPONENT 72.7 - (Rating = 0*) |
|
|
TULSA is 9-19 against the money line (-13.4 Units) when playing against a team with a losing record over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 76.1, OPPONENT 77.8 - (Rating = 1*) | TULSA is 4-11 against the money line (-11.6 Units) when playing against a team with a losing record after 15+ games after 15+ games over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 76.7, OPPONENT 78.7 - (Rating = 2*) | TULSA is 1-8 against the money line (-9.8 Units) when playing against a marginal losing team (Win Pct. 40% to 49%) after 15+ games over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 75.8, OPPONENT 80.8 - (Rating = 3*) | TULSA is 3-10 against the money line (-11.4 Units) versus teams who attempt 16 or more 3 point shots/game on the season after 15+ games over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 74.8, OPPONENT 78.4 - (Rating = 2*) | TULSA is 6-12 against the money line (-9.6 Units) versus teams who attempt 16 or more 3 point shots/game on the season over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 77.7, OPPONENT 77.6 - (Rating = 0*) | TULSA is 3-9 against the money line (-9.9 Units) versus teams who make 5 or more 3 point shots/game on the season after 15+ games over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 74.0, OPPONENT 76.4 - (Rating = 1*) | TULSA is 6-15 against the money line (-10.6 Units) versus up-tempo teams averaging 62 or more shots/game after 15+ games over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 79.6, OPPONENT 81.3 - (Rating = 1*) | TULSA is 2-12 against the money line (-10.7 Units) vs. good free throw shooting teams - making >=76% of their attempts after 15+ games over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 78.3, OPPONENT 83.9 - (Rating = 1*) | TULSA is 1-9 against the money line (-9.9 Units) vs. excellent free throw shooting teams - making >=80% of their shots after 15+ games over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 77.8, OPPONENT 85.7 - (Rating = 3*) | TULSA is 6-30 against the money line (-23.3 Units) vs. excellent free throw shooting teams - making >=80% of their shots since 1997.
The average score was TULSA 77.7, OPPONENT 87.2 - (Rating = 2*) | TULSA is 6-13 against the money line (-9.7 Units) versus horrible foul drawing teams - attempting <=21 free throws/game after 15+ games over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 80.3, OPPONENT 81.8 - (Rating = 0*) | TULSA is 6-17 against the money line (-13.8 Units) versus poor foul drawing teams - attempting <=24 free throws/game after 15+ games over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 78.8, OPPONENT 81.3 - (Rating = 2*) | TULSA is 3-11 against the money line (-11.7 Units) versus poor pressure defensive teams - forcing <=14 turnovers/game after 15+ games over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 76.1, OPPONENT 80.1 - (Rating = 3*) | TULSA is 6-16 against the money line (-12.2 Units) versus terrible defensive teams - allowing 73+ points/game after 15+ games over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 79.6, OPPONENT 81.7 - (Rating = 2*) | TULSA is 1-7 against the money line (-7.9 Units) versus teams who average 7 or less steals/game on the season after 15+ games over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 73.8, OPPONENT 83.3 - (Rating = 1*) |
|
| | |
|
TULSA is 16-14 against the money line (+11.7 Units) after having lost 5 or 6 of their last 7 games over the last 3 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 80.9, OPPONENT 82.2 - (Rating = 0*) | TULSA is 12-10 against the money line (+12.3 Units) after having lost 6 or 7 of their last 8 games over the last 3 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 81.2, OPPONENT 81.9 - (Rating = 0*) | WASHINGTON is 223-346 against the money line (-109.7 Units) in all games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.4, OPPONENT 73.7 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 66-69 against the money line (-40.6 Units) as a home favorite of -250 or less since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 71.8, OPPONENT 70.9 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 134-151 against the money line (-62.0 Units) in home games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 71.4, OPPONENT 71.9 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 68-110 against the money line (-48.9 Units) in July games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.3, OPPONENT 73.8 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 156-233 against the money line (-70.3 Units) in May, June, or July games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 71.1, OPPONENT 73.6 - (Rating = 0*) | WASHINGTON is 134-212 against the money line (-88.6 Units) after a division game since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.1, OPPONENT 73.6 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 95-156 against the money line (-60.3 Units) when playing 5 or less games in 14 days since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 71.3, OPPONENT 74.4 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 102-178 against the money line (-77.1 Units) when playing only their 2nd game in 5 days since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.6, OPPONENT 74.5 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 23-40 against the money line (-24.3 Units) in home games after 3 straight games - allowing a shooting pct. of 42% or higher since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 71.1, OPPONENT 75.2 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 5-13 against the money line (-10.0 Units) after covering 3 of their last 4 against the spread over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was WASHINGTON 72.8, OPPONENT 75.7 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 34-54 against the money line (-26.9 Units) after having won 3 of their last 4 games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 71.9, OPPONENT 73.3 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 3-12 against the money line (-11.8 Units) after covering 4 or 5 of their last 6 against the spread over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.7, OPPONENT 75.9 - (Rating = 3*) | WASHINGTON is 12-39 against the money line (-36.9 Units) after covering 4 of their last 5 against the spread since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 68.9, OPPONENT 75.1 - (Rating = 5*) | WASHINGTON is 39-43 against the money line (-24.7 Units) in home games off a win against a division rival since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 71.6, OPPONENT 70.8 - (Rating = 0*) | WASHINGTON is 79-153 against the money line (-70.3 Units) after allowing 70 points or more in 2 straight games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 71.1, OPPONENT 75.8 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 50-102 against the money line (-55.7 Units) after allowing 70 points or more in 3 straight games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 71.0, OPPONENT 75.9 - (Rating = 2*) | WASHINGTON is 36-67 against the money line (-30.0 Units) after allowing 70 points or more in 4 straight games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 71.3, OPPONENT 76.4 - (Rating = 0*) | WASHINGTON is 92-171 against the money line (-74.1 Units) after allowing 75 points or more since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 71.1, OPPONENT 75.6 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 44-91 against the money line (-52.3 Units) after allowing 75 points or more in 2 straight games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 71.2, OPPONENT 76.5 - (Rating = 2*) | WASHINGTON is 24-51 against the money line (-27.4 Units) after allowing 75 points or more in 3 straight games since 1997.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.8, OPPONENT 76.4 - (Rating = 1*) |
|
|
TULSA is 18-36 against the money line (-16.4 Units) in all games over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 79.5, OPPONENT 81.6 - (Rating = 0*) | TULSA is 22-70 against the money line (-40.6 Units) in May, June, or July games since 1997.
The average score was TULSA 77.6, OPPONENT 85.0 - (Rating = 2*) | TULSA is 13-39 against the money line (-21.8 Units) after 3 straight games - allowing a shooting pct. of 42% or higher since 1997.
The average score was TULSA 75.6, OPPONENT 82.9 - (Rating = 0*) | TULSA is 10-39 against the money line (-22.9 Units) after a game - allowing a shooting pct. of 50% or higher since 1997.
The average score was TULSA 74.7, OPPONENT 83.2 - (Rating = 0*) | TULSA is 8-18 against the money line (-13.9 Units) after a game where a team made 80% of their free throws or better over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 77.7, OPPONENT 80.8 - (Rating = 2*) | TULSA is 3-10 against the money line (-9.9 Units) after 2 straight games making 80% of their free throws or better over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 78.1, OPPONENT 81.9 - (Rating = 2*) | TULSA is 10-23 against the money line (-14.5 Units) after one or more consecutive overs over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 79.0, OPPONENT 81.7 - (Rating = 1*) | TULSA is 3-10 against the money line (-10.3 Units) after a road game where both teams score 75 or more points over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 83.1, OPPONENT 88.4 - (Rating = 2*) | TULSA is 4-13 against the money line (-9.2 Units) after allowing 70 points or more in 2 straight games this season.
The average score was TULSA 83.9, OPPONENT 88.1 - (Rating = 0*) | TULSA is 2-9 against the money line (-8.1 Units) after allowing 70 points or more in 5 straight games this season.
The average score was TULSA 83.4, OPPONENT 87.4 - (Rating = 2*) | TULSA is 5-15 against the money line (-10.2 Units) after allowing 75 points or more this season.
The average score was TULSA 83.4, OPPONENT 86.8 - (Rating = 1*) | TULSA is 4-13 against the money line (-9.2 Units) after allowing 75 points or more in 2 straight games this season.
The average score was TULSA 83.9, OPPONENT 88.1 - (Rating = 0*) | TULSA is 2-9 against the money line (-8.1 Units) after allowing 75 points or more in 5 straight games this season.
The average score was TULSA 83.4, OPPONENT 87.4 - (Rating = 2*) | TULSA is 8-23 against the money line (-15.3 Units) after allowing 80 points or more over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 80.3, OPPONENT 84.2 - (Rating = 1*) | TULSA is 2-8 against the money line (-7.1 Units) after a close loss by 3 points or less over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 75.3, OPPONENT 82.6 - (Rating = 0*) | TULSA is 4-13 against the money line (-9.2 Units) after 2 straight games where both teams scored 70 points or more this season.
The average score was TULSA 83.9, OPPONENT 88.1 - (Rating = 0*) | TULSA is 2-9 against the money line (-8.1 Units) after scoring 70 points or more in 5 straight games this season.
The average score was TULSA 83.4, OPPONENT 87.4 - (Rating = 2*) | TULSA is 4-14 against the money line (-10.7 Units) after a game where both teams scored 75 points or more this season.
The average score was TULSA 82.8, OPPONENT 86.6 - (Rating = 1*) | TULSA is 4-14 against the money line (-10.7 Units) after scoring 75 points or more this season.
The average score was TULSA 82.8, OPPONENT 86.6 - (Rating = 1*) | TULSA is 8-15 against the money line (-12.0 Units) after scoring 80 points or more over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 79.8, OPPONENT 80.7 - (Rating = 1*) | TULSA is 3-11 against the money line (-9.2 Units) after scoring 90 points or more over the last 3 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 78.8, OPPONENT 82.2 - (Rating = 0*) | TULSA is 10-24 against the money line (-15.5 Units) after a combined score of 155 points or more over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 80.9, OPPONENT 83.0 - (Rating = 1*) | TULSA is 6-15 against the money line (-12.2 Units) after a combined score of 165 points or more over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 79.8, OPPONENT 81.8 - (Rating = 2*) | TULSA is 4-12 against the money line (-11.4 Units) after a combined score of 175 points or more over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 79.5, OPPONENT 81.4 - (Rating = 2*) | TULSA is 7-16 against the money line (-10.7 Units) after playing a game as a road underdog over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 78.5, OPPONENT 83.5 - (Rating = 0*) | TULSA is 7-17 against the money line (-11.7 Units) after playing a road game over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was TULSA 78.1, OPPONENT 83.0 - (Rating = 1*) | WASHINGTON is 13-10 against the money line (+9.5 Units) when playing 3 or less games in 10 days over the last 2 seasons.
The average score was WASHINGTON 76.0, OPPONENT 75.7 - (Rating = 0*) | WASHINGTON is 5-1 against the money line (+7.1 Units) after a game where both teams scored 75 points or more this season.
The average score was WASHINGTON 79.2, OPPONENT 72.5 - (Rating = 1*) |
|
| | |
|
|
| All Games | 8-16 | -6.8 | 14-10 | 18-6 | 83.0 | 39.3 | 43.9% | 42.5 | 85.0 | 42.6 | 47.6% | 39.6 | | Road Games | 3-9 | -4.6 | 8-4 | 11-1 | 83.9 | 37.7 | 45.4% | 42.4 | 88.7 | 42.7 | 47.9% | 40.4 | | Last 5 Games | 1-4 | -3.6 | 2-3 | 5-0 | 85.8 | 40.4 | 45.0% | 39.2 | 92.0 | 46.4 | 51.5% | 39.4 |
|
| |
|
|
| Team Stats (All Games) | 83.0 | 39.3 | 30-69 | 43.9% | 5-17 | 31.7% | 17-22 | 77.4% | 42 | 11 | 16 | 21 | 7 | 12 | 3 | | vs opponents surrendering | 77.6 | 38.3 | 29-66 | 44.2% | 5-15 | 32.9% | 14-18 | 78.8% | 41 | 9 | 17 | 18 | 8 | 13 | 4 | | Team Stats (Road Games) | 83.9 | 37.7 | 31-69 | 45.4% | 6-17 | 34.3% | 15-21 | 73.4% | 42 | 12 | 15 | 20 | 7 | 13 | 4 | | Stats Against (All Games) | 85.0 | 42.6 | 31-65 | 47.6% | 5-12 | 38.4% | 18-23 | 80.9% | 40 | 9 | 17 | 20 | 7 | 12 | 5 | | vs opponents averaging | 78.5 | 38.9 | 29-65 | 44.8% | 5-14 | 35.2% | 15-19 | 79.7% | 40 | 9 | 18 | 18 | 8 | 13 | 4 | | Stats Against (Road Games) | 88.7 | 42.7 | 32-67 | 47.9% | 5-13 | 38.1% | 19-23 | 81.4% | 40 | 10 | 18 | 20 | 7 | 12 | 5 |
|
|
| |
|
|
| All Games | 11-13 | -0.7 | 12-12 | 10-14 | 74.6 | 36.3 | 43.1% | 42.7 | 75.1 | 36.9 | 41.8% | 41.5 | | Home Games | 5-7 | -4.6 | 5-7 | 4-8 | 72.9 | 34.0 | 41.2% | 44.4 | 73.7 | 34.6 | 41.5% | 41.6 | | Last 5 Games | 4-1 | +5.4 | 4-1 | 3-2 | 81.8 | 40.2 | 46.3% | 39.8 | 75.8 | 39.8 | 42.4% | 39.8 |
|
| |
|
|
| Team Stats (All Games) | 74.6 | 36.3 | 28-65 | 43.1% | 5-17 | 30.0% | 13-16 | 82.1% | 43 | 10 | 17 | 19 | 7 | 14 | 3 | | vs opponents surrendering | 78 | 38.5 | 29-66 | 44.0% | 5-14 | 33.5% | 15-19 | 78.4% | 41 | 9 | 17 | 19 | 8 | 14 | 4 | | Team Stats (Home Games) | 72.9 | 34.0 | 27-66 | 41.2% | 5-17 | 27.1% | 13-16 | 82.5% | 44 | 10 | 17 | 19 | 8 | 15 | 2 | | Stats Against (All Games) | 75.1 | 36.9 | 28-68 | 41.8% | 5-14 | 33.7% | 14-19 | 74.4% | 42 | 10 | 17 | 17 | 8 | 12 | 3 | | vs opponents averaging | 78.3 | 38.9 | 29-66 | 44.0% | 5-14 | 34.0% | 15-19 | 77.6% | 41 | 9 | 17 | 19 | 8 | 14 | 4 | | Stats Against (Home Games) | 73.7 | 34.6 | 28-67 | 41.5% | 4-14 | 33.1% | 14-18 | 73.4% | 42 | 10 | 17 | 18 | 9 | 13 | 3 |
|
| | Average power rating of opponents played: TULSA 71, WASHINGTON 70.3 |
| | |
|
|
| 6/15/2014 | SEATTLE | 85-79 | W | -270 | 31-66 | 47.0% | 40 | 8 | 29-55 | 52.7% | 29 | 11 | | 6/19/2014 | @ LOS ANGELES | 77-87 | L | +210 | 30-69 | 43.5% | 45 | 14 | 34-66 | 51.5% | 44 | 14 | | 6/20/2014 | @ PHOENIX | 80-91 | L | +500 | 31-79 | 39.2% | 54 | 5 | 34-66 | 51.5% | 35 | 8 | | 6/22/2014 | @ CHICAGO | 105-99 | W | +120 | 37-74 | 50.0% | 43 | 17 | 39-77 | 50.6% | 42 | 14 | | 6/25/2014 | @ INDIANA | 107-102 | W | +170 | 39-78 | 50.0% | 46 | 14 | 34-74 | 45.9% | 45 | 12 | | 6/28/2014 | LOS ANGELES | 89-92 | L | -115 | 31-74 | 41.9% | 47 | 16 | 36-76 | 47.4% | 46 | 11 | | 6/29/2014 | PHOENIX | 77-80 | L | +170 | 24-77 | 31.2% | 50 | 12 | 25-51 | 49.0% | 33 | 13 | | 7/1/2014 | @ NEW YORK | 74-90 | L | +120 | 28-70 | 40.0% | 34 | 9 | 36-68 | 52.9% | 52 | 14 | | 7/3/2014 | @ CONNECTICUT | 96-83 | W | +155 | 35-73 | 47.9% | 52 | 12 | 31-71 | 43.7% | 38 | 12 | | 7/5/2014 | CONNECTICUT | 76-78 | L | -165 | 27-67 | 40.3% | 42 | 11 | 30-68 | 44.1% | 43 | 14 | | 7/8/2014 | INDIANA | 76-78 | L | -115 | 25-59 | 42.4% | 41 | 15 | 28-63 | 44.4% | 36 | 11 | | 7/10/2014 | MINNESOTA | 85-91 | L | +135 | 31-72 | 43.1% | 36 | 10 | 33-60 | 55.0% | 40 | 12 | | 7/12/2014 | WASHINGTON | 74-91 | L | -165 | 28-71 | 39.4% | 42 | 10 | 34-70 | 48.6% | 48 | 13 | | 7/16/2014 | @ MINNESOTA | 82-93 | L | +300 | 27-66 | 40.9% | 44 | 16 | 34-70 | 48.6% | 39 | 8 | | 7/17/2014 | SAN ANTONIO | 95-90 | W | -115 | 30-60 | 50.0% | 43 | 10 | 33-64 | 51.6% | 29 | 12 | | 7/22/2014 | @ SAN ANTONIO | 93-95 | L | +145 | 37-71 | 52.1% | 31 | 8 | 38-70 | 54.3% | 41 | 9 | | 7/25/2014 | @ WASHINGTON | | | | | | | | | | | | | 7/27/2014 | CHICAGO | | | | | | | | | | | | | 7/29/2014 | SEATTLE | | | | | | | | | | | | | 7/31/2014 | ATLANTA | | | | | | | | | | | | | 8/2/2014 | MINNESOTA | | | | | | | | | | | | | 8/5/2014 | @ LOS ANGELES | | | | | | | | | | | | | 8/8/2014 | SAN ANTONIO | | | | | | | | | | | | | 8/10/2014 | @ SEATTLE | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 6/15/2014 | ATLANTA | 67-75 | L | +155 | 26-62 | 41.9% | 42 | 19 | 26-68 | 38.2% | 52 | 17 | | 6/18/2014 | @ ATLANTA | 73-83 | L | +250 | 31-72 | 43.1% | 38 | 14 | 31-69 | 44.9% | 45 | 10 | | 6/20/2014 | @ MINNESOTA | 65-75 | L | +280 | 23-64 | 35.9% | 39 | 9 | 32-69 | 46.4% | 44 | 10 | | 6/22/2014 | @ SEATTLE | 86-89 | L | +145 | 36-69 | 52.2% | 35 | 11 | 31-72 | 43.1% | 45 | 8 | | 6/24/2014 | @ SAN ANTONIO | 81-70 | W | +200 | 32-63 | 50.8% | 40 | 9 | 27-69 | 39.1% | 37 | 8 | | 6/27/2014 | CONNECTICUT | 69-63 | W | -155 | 27-68 | 39.7% | 48 | 13 | 26-65 | 40.0% | 36 | 14 | | 6/29/2014 | SAN ANTONIO | 65-73 | L | -140 | 24-63 | 38.1% | 43 | 12 | 26-65 | 40.0% | 42 | 7 | | 7/2/2014 | INDIANA | 77-80 | L | -175 | 27-63 | 42.9% | 37 | 14 | 31-59 | 52.5% | 38 | 17 | | 7/5/2014 | @ ATLANTA | 73-86 | L | +300 | 29-65 | 44.6% | 44 | 15 | 35-76 | 46.1% | 48 | 8 | | 7/9/2014 | @ CHICAGO | 72-65 | W | +145 | 23-63 | 36.5% | 41 | 12 | 21-67 | 31.3% | 50 | 15 | | 7/12/2014 | @ TULSA | 91-74 | W | +145 | 34-70 | 48.6% | 48 | 13 | 28-71 | 39.4% | 42 | 10 | | 7/15/2014 | @ PHOENIX | 78-90 | L | +400 | 32-68 | 47.1% | 34 | 12 | 34-63 | 54.0% | 39 | 12 | | 7/17/2014 | @ LOS ANGELES | 79-75 | W | +250 | 29-59 | 49.2% | 40 | 22 | 26-57 | 45.6% | 26 | 19 | | 7/23/2014 | CONNECTICUT | 89-75 | W | -175 | 32-64 | 50.0% | 36 | 12 | 31-72 | 43.1% | 42 | 11 | | 7/25/2014 | TULSA | | | | | | | | | | | | | 7/27/2014 | ATLANTA | | | | | | | | | | | | | 7/29/2014 | @ NEW YORK | | | | | | | | | | | | | 8/3/2014 | @ CHICAGO | | | | | | | | | | | | | 8/5/2014 | NEW YORK | | | | | | | | | | | | | 8/8/2014 | @ INDIANA | | | | | | | | | | | | | 8/10/2014 | @ CONNECTICUT | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
| | |
| WASHINGTON is 25-26 (+5.9 Units) against the money line versus TULSA since 1997 |
| |
| WASHINGTON is 4-1 (+4.6 Units) against the money line versus TULSA over the last 3 seasons |
|
|
|
| |
| WASHINGTON is 15-11 (+3.5 Units) against the money line versus TULSA since 1997 |
| |
| WASHINGTON is 2-0 (+2.0 Units) against the money line versus TULSA over the last 3 seasons |
|
|
|
| |
|
7/12/2014 | WASHINGTON | 91 | 156 | SU ATS | 55 | 34-70 | 48.6% | 7-13 | 53.8% | 16-18 | 88.9% | 48 | 13 | 13 | | | TULSA | 74 | -3.5 | Over | 42 | 28-71 | 39.4% | 5-19 | 26.3% | 13-22 | 59.1% | 42 | 10 | 10 | 6/30/2013 | TULSA | 61 | 159.5 | Under | 34 | 17-70 | 24.3% | 8-31 | 25.8% | 19-24 | 79.2% | 40 | 14 | 15 | | | WASHINGTON | 84 | -3.5 | SU ATS | 44 | 29-67 | 43.3% | 5-11 | 45.5% | 21-27 | 77.8% | 62 | 17 | 18 | 5/27/2013 | WASHINGTON | 95 | 157 | SU ATS | 47 | 31-67 | 46.3% | 7-16 | 43.7% | 26-38 | 68.4% | 50 | 7 | 14 | | | TULSA | 90 | -6.5 | Over | 46 | 32-74 | 43.2% | 8-16 | 50.0% | 18-22 | 81.8% | 44 | 9 | 15 |
|
| | |
|
Mike is 5-13 against the money line (-10.0 Units) after covering 3 of their last 4 against the spread as the coach of WASHINGTON.
The average score was WASHINGTON 72.8, OPPONENT 75.7 - (Rating = 1*) | Mike is 3-12 against the money line (-11.8 Units) after covering 4 or 5 of their last 6 against the spread as the coach of WASHINGTON.
The average score was WASHINGTON 70.7, OPPONENT 75.9 - (Rating = 3*) | Mike is 8-11 against the money line (-16.3 Units) in home games versus teams who average 7 or less steals/game on the season after 15+ games in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Mike 69.1, OPPONENT 70.7 - (Rating = 1*) | Mike is 36-39 against the money line (-26.1 Units) versus teams who average 7 or less steals/game on the season in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Mike 72.9, OPPONENT 73.8 - (Rating = 0*) |
|
|
Fred is 16-35 against the money line (-20.7 Units) in road games in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 74.8, OPPONENT 80.2 - (Rating = 1*) | Fred is 14-34 against the money line (-21.0 Units) in a road game where where the total is greater than or equal to 140 in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 75.3, OPPONENT 81.2 - (Rating = 1*) | Fred is 7-22 against the money line (-17.7 Units) in a road game where where the total is greater than or equal to 150 in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 78.9, OPPONENT 86.2 - (Rating = 2*) | Fred is 4-19 against the money line (-15.7 Units) in road games after 2 consecutive division games in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 75.6, OPPONENT 84.4 - (Rating = 1*) | Fred is 8-18 against the money line (-13.1 Units) in road games when playing only their 2nd game in 5 days in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 74.6, OPPONENT 79.5 - (Rating = 1*) | Fred is 4-14 against the money line (-12.2 Units) in road games in non-conference games in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 76.5, OPPONENT 85.7 - (Rating = 1*) | Fred is 11-19 against the money line (-16.1 Units) off a loss against a division rival in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 78.9, OPPONENT 81.1 - (Rating = 1*) | Fred is 1-7 against the money line (-8.7 Units) in road games off a cover where the team lost the game straight up as an underdog in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 79.3, OPPONENT 93.6 - (Rating = 1*) | Fred is 4-12 against the money line (-10.9 Units) in road games off a road loss in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 74.8, OPPONENT 82.1 - (Rating = 1*) | Fred is 2-9 against the money line (-8.1 Units) after allowing 70 points or more in 5 straight games as the coach of TULSA.
The average score was TULSA 83.4, OPPONENT 87.4 - (Rating = 1*) | Fred is 2-9 against the money line (-8.1 Units) after allowing 75 points or more in 5 straight games as the coach of TULSA.
The average score was TULSA 83.4, OPPONENT 87.4 - (Rating = 1*) | Fred is 4-17 against the money line (-16.5 Units) after a loss by 6 points or less in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 79.3, OPPONENT 85.3 - (Rating = 3*) | Fred is 7-18 against the money line (-14.2 Units) in road games after scoring 70 points or more in 3 straight games in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 78.2, OPPONENT 83.8 - (Rating = 1*) | Fred is 13-24 against the money line (-18.7 Units) after scoring 70 points or more in 4 straight games in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 79.9, OPPONENT 81.0 - (Rating = 1*) | Fred is 2-9 against the money line (-8.1 Units) after scoring 70 points or more in 5 straight games as the coach of TULSA.
The average score was TULSA 83.4, OPPONENT 87.4 - (Rating = 1*) | Fred is 4-14 against the money line (-10.7 Units) after a game where both teams scored 75 points or more as the coach of TULSA.
The average score was TULSA 82.8, OPPONENT 86.6 - (Rating = 1*) | Fred is 4-14 against the money line (-10.7 Units) after scoring 75 points or more as the coach of TULSA.
The average score was TULSA 82.8, OPPONENT 86.6 - (Rating = 1*) | Fred is 6-17 against the money line (-14.3 Units) in road games after playing a game as an underdog in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 75.7, OPPONENT 83.3 - (Rating = 2*) | Fred is 5-13 against the money line (-10.9 Units) in road games after playing a game as a road underdog in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 75.4, OPPONENT 82.9 - (Rating = 0*) | Fred is 6-15 against the money line (-11.2 Units) in road games after playing a road game in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 75.3, OPPONENT 82.0 - (Rating = 0*) | Fred is 18-32 against the money line (-27.2 Units) after 1 or more consecutive losses in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 77.8, OPPONENT 79.9 - (Rating = 2*) | Fred is 3-11 against the money line (-9.4 Units) in road games versus teams who make 5 or more 3 point shots/game on the season in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 73.6, OPPONENT 82.3 - (Rating = 0*) | Fred is 16-27 against the money line (-24.5 Units) versus up-tempo teams averaging 62 or more shots/game after 15+ games in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 76.7, OPPONENT 78.9 - (Rating = 2*) | Fred is 3-18 against the money line (-16.1 Units) in road games vs. good free throw shooting teams - making >=76% of their attempts in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 72.9, OPPONENT 82.9 - (Rating = 2*) | Fred is 1-9 against the money line (-10.4 Units) vs. excellent free throw shooting teams - making >=80% of their shots after 15+ games in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 78.2, OPPONENT 86.0 - (Rating = 3*) | Fred is 3-17 against the money line (-16.4 Units) vs. excellent free throw shooting teams - making >=80% of their shots in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 76.5, OPPONENT 83.6 - (Rating = 4*) | Fred is 12-29 against the money line (-18.7 Units) in road games versus poor foul drawing teams - attempting <=24 free throws/game in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 74.0, OPPONENT 80.0 - (Rating = 1*) | Fred is 8-20 against the money line (-24.8 Units) versus poor pressure defensive teams - forcing <=14 turnovers/game after 15+ games in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 74.2, OPPONENT 77.8 - (Rating = 4*) | Fred is 15-25 against the money line (-22.6 Units) versus poor pressure defensive teams - forcing <=14 turnovers/game in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 76.0, OPPONENT 77.9 - (Rating = 2*) | Fred is 8-18 against the money line (-21.2 Units) versus teams who average 42 or more rebounds/game on the season after 15+ games in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 74.9, OPPONENT 77.4 - (Rating = 3*) | Fred is 12-19 against the money line (-18.0 Units) versus teams who average 42 or more rebounds/game on the season in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 76.6, OPPONENT 78.4 - (Rating = 1*) | Fred is 13-23 against the money line (-27.3 Units) versus terrible defensive teams - allowing 73+ points/game after 15+ games in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 77.9, OPPONENT 78.7 - (Rating = 3*) | Fred is 22-32 against the money line (-28.3 Units) versus terrible defensive teams - allowing 73+ points/game in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 79.0, OPPONENT 79.2 - (Rating = 2*) | Fred is 9-20 against the money line (-17.9 Units) versus explosive offensive teams - scoring 73+ points/game after 15+ games in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 76.4, OPPONENT 80.2 - (Rating = 2*) | Fred is 17-31 against the money line (-20.3 Units) versus explosive offensive teams - scoring 73+ points/game in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Fred 78.7, OPPONENT 81.8 - (Rating = 1*) | Mike is 158-111 against the money line (+24.5 Units) in May, June, or July games in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Mike 76.6, OPPONENT 74.4 - (Rating = 0*) | Mike is 58-36 against the money line (+18.5 Units) on Friday in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Mike 76.7, OPPONENT 73.3 - (Rating = 0*) | Mike is 13-10 against the money line (+9.5 Units) when playing 3 or less games in 10 days as the coach of WASHINGTON.
The average score was WASHINGTON 76.0, OPPONENT 75.7 - (Rating = 0*) | Mike is 54-18 against the money line (+28.4 Units) in home games after covering 2 of their last 3 against the spread in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Mike 78.6, OPPONENT 71.9 - (Rating = 2*) | Mike is 19-2 against the money line (+16.3 Units) in home games after scoring 75 points or more in 4 straight games in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Mike 81.8, OPPONENT 74.0 - (Rating = 4*) | Mike is 46-28 against the money line (+16.8 Units) versus good ball handling teams - committing <=14 turnovers/game after 15+ games in all games he has coached since 1997.
The average score was Mike 73.4, OPPONENT 70.0 - (Rating = 1*) |
|
| | |
|
| Since 1997, the home favorite won the game straight up 119 times, while the road underdog won straight up 54 times. No Edge. | | Over the last 3 seasons, the home favorite won the game straight up 9 times, while the road underdog won straight up 9 times. No Edge. |
|
| | |
| No significant injuries. | |
| [F] 07/23/2014 - Jelena Milovanovic "?" Friday vs. Tulsa Shock ( Knee ) |
|
|
| | Last Updated: 5/5/2024 3:35:41 PM EST. |
|
|
| |
|